A subject that has garnered a lot of attention in baseball circles this year is the prospect of Albert Pujols’ proposed new contract with the St. Louis Cardinals including an ownership share of the team.
According to one rumor, the idea was floated during the first quarter discussions between Pujols’ agent, Dan Lozano, and club executives, but was tabled. It came up again this week in a Jon Heyman article at SI.com.
Perhaps it will arise once again when talks resume this fall.
Is it a good or bad thing?
At first blush, the Cardinals might seem motivated to consider this concept. On a general basis, ownership has expressed a willingness to introduce creative elements into the discussions. The intent could be to use non-cash items to bring down the out-of-pocket expense on what might otherwise be an MLB-record contract.
Could there have been motivation to externally leak this particular component?
One possibility is its potential value in influencing public perception. In some quarters, the rumor mill has depicted the Cardinals as having low-balled Pujols with their contract offer. From the team’s perspective, an equity example might help de-emphasize a harsh view of the standard average annual value (AAV) calculation of the proposal.
It could be a differentiator for the Cardinals’ bid. Other clubs may be more reluctant to offer an ownership stake, instead perhaps more inclined to bid straight money and years to a player new to their organization.
It could also hurt the Cardinals’ negotiating position. While Pujols could see tax advantages in this approach as well as potential growth in his ownership share of the club over time, if chasing an MLB-record AAV is what he wants most, this would get in the way of maximizing his raw dollars and perhaps years.
Is ownership motivated?
Let’s take a quick look at the rough value of the team, as reported by Forbes. Last spring, they placed a value of $488 million on the Cardinals, the eighth-most valuable club in MLB by their estimates. A one-percent share would equate to roughly $5 million and you can do the math from there.
In other words, would it be worth it to ownership to save $50 million over the life of Pujols’ next deal to cede a ten percent share of the Cardinals? It seems a high price to pay.
There could also be internal issues. Which owners would be willing to dilute their stakes to make room for Pujols? There are over a dozen investors in the Cardinals current ownership group.
The concept of a player holding an equity stake in his team is allowable by Major League Baseball but requires permission of the commissioner. If it came down to it, would that approval be granted easily?
I would be very surprised if MLB or any team’s owners would be eager to risk the potential of exposing their books to an active player and member of the Players’ Union.
In other words, it might be good PR for the Cardinals if fans think Pujols is under consideration for partial ownership, but that doesn’t mean they intend to pull the trigger – at least initially.
Now, later or not at all?
One variation could be to give the player an option to acquire shares at a pre-defined price upon his retirement. Again, there is potential downside, though on appearance less than in the case of granting immediate team equity.
This agreement would remain on the books for another decade or so and could become an inhibitor if a broader change in ownership was considered during that time. Would a prospective new ownership group want to have Pujols involved, for example?
In recent reader polling this spring at The Cardinal Nation Blog, fans embraced the idea. Almost 50 percent of voters would include a future share of team ownership in Pujols’ new contract, while 17 percent would do it effective immediately. The other third oppose the concept regardless of when it would be executed.
Does a new CBA offer opportunity?
Recently, I have read a number of writers expressing surprise that with all the labor strife currently occurring across professional sports, specifically in the NFL and NBA, that MLB seems the exception. I wonder if they realize negotiations between the union and ownership on a new basic agreement haven’t fully gotten underway.
If completed by this coming December, the new collective bargaining agreement would take effect at that time. If not, players could continue to decide to play in 2012 on an interim basis as the new deal is hammered out. There is always the possibility of a strike if negotiations turn ugly.
One could only imagine how concerns over an active player and member of the union potentially having access to the books of a major league team might complicate negotiations.
For that reason alone, I don’t see the immediate equity scenario happening. The owners would seem to have too much to lose by the risk of opening up their financials – now or in the foreseeable future.
Does it benefit anyone other than the player?
Former commissioner Fay Vincent, who was once fired by the owners by the way, has been at the lead of the movement, pushing this concept of player equity in clubs. I recently wrote him about it, asking several questions including why the owners would ever allow this. He did not reply.
Vincent’s remarks and articles on the subject stress the tax advantages from the player perspective. I suspect Vincent also very well knows the problems it could create for ownership and to a lesser extent for the union, but apparently has reasons to downplay that important dynamic. Perhaps he is trying to build a groundswell of support among those who aren’t thinking this all the way through.
The idea of players getting access to ownerships’ finances would certainly offer the potential to disrupt the labor calm in MLB, wouldn’t it?
The union angle
MLB Players Association Executive Director and General Counsel Michael Weiner has said that he is not necessarily for or against the concept of players holding an equity share in their team while noting it would require both internal union dialogue as well as discussion with ownership. After all, perhaps the union might also be uncomfortable with owners among their rank and file.
It is important to consider possible impacts to the game once the door is opened. If granted to Pujols, there would be nothing to stop the expansion of ownership to a broader base of players. In fact, Vincent’s advocacy is not restricted to Pujols; the Cardinals star is just one immediate example.
In an October panel discussion that included Vincent, Weiner noted possible integrity issues that a broader partnership could raise. A scenario was cited in which players on one team would benefit financially if a different team was to make the playoffs.
One weak link can break the chain
My bottom line is that while the idea of granting Pujols a share of the Cardinals has a nice feel to it, the various inhibitors are such that I really question whether it will happen this fall. Any one of the items mentioned above could scuttle the idea, with likely other inhibitors not yet brought to light.
Perhaps the details of a player holding equity in his club will be hammered out some day, but it seems like it would take considerable time and effort to make it a reality.
On the other hand, if the Cardinals don’t come up with some creative aspects to successfully inject into the proposed contract other than flat dollars and years, they may be forced into the unpleasant prospect of either matching the highest bid Pujols can secure in the free agent market or watching him walk away.
Even if so, would that be more palatable to ownership than ceding a chunk of the team and everything that goes with it?
Follow me on Twitter.
Follow The Cardinal Nation Blog on Facebook.
Note that I did not even mention Pujols’ current slump in the article as I don’t see it yet materially affecting his market value established over the last decade.
Baffling……………..I believe is the word that comes to mind………………….fidgeting……….
Famous quote by the Cardinals legal spokesman…..” well, not all ownership shares pays a dividend”.
The commissioner is using his discretionary fund to float how many teams at this point? Ruppert Murdock hand in hand. The volume of capital that is flowing through the game is completely manipulated……… and that manipulation has many purposes. They have been talked about here.
And this is yet another article about how we will get Pujols money………because of his market value…..huh!!
The market is an illusion………its volume is a fabrication………… Pittsburgh is in contention…as are the Marlins…………. the Rays won the east last year………… your in the middle of one of the most interesting power plays of all time ……in sports anyway………. only the Selig/Bush steroids play was as interesting…………………… and you think that the Fox revenues that are being thrown around are about people watch TV???????????????
“Famous quote by the Cardinals legal spokesman…..” well, not all ownership shares pays a dividend”.” And not all have voting rights.
The thing is, does anybody else see it affecting his market value.
While it is true that the most likely thing to happen in the future is what has happened in the past, the more recent past should have the greatest predictive value, shouldn’t it? The predictive value decreases as the ‘past’ becomes more remote.
I can hear the checkbooks slamming shut.
Most of the national sports media have expressed the opinion that Pujols will not remain with the Cardinals. Then suddenly one, Jon Heyman, backs off and states he believes Pujols will remain in St. Louis, for just this reason, citing ubiquitous “sources”. Is it possible that the Cardinals are considering this as an option? I would agree that ownership stake while a current player is not likely for the reasons you stated, but ownership after retirement would not pose the same risks. I understand that it would dilute the shares of other owners, but surely something could be worked out to make it more palatable.
But even i fit is after retirement, it would seem the Pujols team would have to see the books now in order to know the value this could possibly provide their client.
Sure, but he wouldn’t be an active player,
but at the time he negotiated the deal he would be. you are not going to accept part of a team (even in the future) if you cant evaluate what itis worth.
Most of the national sports media has said that Albert will remain a Cardinal for life. A few have jumped off the bandwagon in the last couple of weeks but most agree he will sign with the Cards.
Welcome, Larry. Sorry I missed your first post held in the queue. I am traveling this weekend so time has been tight. Hope you will hang around…
Thanks. I will hang around as it looks like you have a lot of posters on here who can add something to my Cardinal experience:) Just a side note on me for anyone who cares. I am 48 and have been a Cardinal fan my whole life. I love baseball and even though I have been watching it and playing it for over 40 years I still learn at least 1 new thing about it every year.
Right now Pujols is playing like he wants shares in the GCL team.
Actually if Pujols is interested, part/total ownership of the Springfield franchise gets around a lot of these issues. Minor League teams have appreciated in value just as much or more than major league teams the last few years.
I imagine the entire Springfield club is worth less than one year of Pujols’ salary.
Martinez (Matias) starts tomorrow for Quad Cities. Might pitch against Kane County on May 26th in St. Louis.
what’s this about the 26th?
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/birdland/article_7fd2d4dc-7829-11e0-9224-0019bb30f31a.html
DG article
Thanks, awesome. I’ll have to take that in as I don’t get up to Davenport anymore.
Glad to hear about Swagerty also. I got interested in him during AFL.
aye, I do wonder what the eventual plan is with Swaggerty. Are they going to Boggs him or is he a for sure starter in St. Louis one day?
I understand stretching him out to get innings in his arm. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Garcia’s arm is really live tonight. Not big sweeping movement of course, that late sharp movement. Tailing one time, diving the next, then snaps off a nasty curve. How sweet it is. I can’t help but contrast that to Motte’s, straight as an arrow. Perfect for a catcher, who doesn’t want those pegs tailing on him, not so much for a pitcher.
doesn’t hurt that the Brewers have no patience. I’m happy to see Garcia doing well, but I can’t help and think that they might have a base runner or two if they worked the count.
Getting his pitch count up would be a good idea. Glad they haven’t thought of it.
Riot hurt himself again? or was it the HBP in the 1st?
They said contusion to the shin. I guess that means its barking pretty bad from the HBP. It was mentioned he didn’t run the bases hard afterwards.
I think it should be pointed out the Yadi is really into this. He is giving allot of good energy, making solid tactical call……….. his little hops and decoy positions are really helping Jamie stay focused.
You complimented Molina? Pardon me while I pick my jaw up off the floor.
We win the game……… do we get all the press?……………..Lets see what he’s got……….
Its like a lab test…………how fine can your intension’s be…… soon as you go over the line, its all gone. Nice recovery.
Nice run, glad he got the shutout.
He ended with poise………thats what its all about………. good for the team…….lets do it again tomorrow.
I was sweating it in the 8th. I am disappointed that Jaime lost the perfecto/no-no, but it was a beautiful game anyway.
Well played by the whole team. Yadi deservs some credit for calling a good game, I’m sure Jaime enjoys working with one of the best.
A very strong game last night. TLR gave Berkman deserved rest and got right swingers into the lineup in Craig, Punto, Greene, and Theriot against the southpaw, so kudos for Tony. Garcia struck out the great hitter Braun three times, highlighting a brilliant performance by Garcia.
Traveling to friends/family’s in Arkansas last night. Got to hear the game on the radio, good descriptions of Jaime’s pitches by announcers. Exciting game. But thought it not a good idea to post or check in on the comments here whilst driving. Fewer comments abt the game than I thought. Two hits from historic! Maybe it seemed more mundane on tv?
Of course, it would be bad form to mention a perfect game/no hitter while its in progress.
It was great game on TV, the view of Jaime’s awesome stuff was great. You would have enjoyed it I’m sure.
That’s true, I didn’t think about that. The announcers chose their words carefully and would say he’s pitching a heck of a game.
It was definitely an exciting game to watch. I was live tweeting with about 30-40 Cardinals fans and sports media and everyone was cooperating and not mentioning that thing that was going on. Jaime was trending in the U.S and everybody was into it, including Buster Olney and the official twitter of MLB.
Something tells me we may have other similar opportunities in the future. Jaime is awesome.
Knock on wood
Absent Wainwright, I guess that Garcia is the team’s new ace, huh?
Wouldn’t that be a pleasantly tough call if it had to be made.
Carp would be the sentimental favorite, deservedly so. The Kyles are strong, Westbrook coming on. But if you had to win, highest possible pressure, would you go with the young guy, or a grizzled veteran?
Jaime handled the pressure well last night.
Let’s see what Lohse and McClellan have to say about it this weekend.
Lohse, Westbrook, and Carpenter, the three old war horses, seem the best bets to eat 200 innings. When healthy, they have done this in the past.
Garcia and McClellan are iffier, in terms of full season workload. I doubt either has shouldered more than 150 innings in a season, majors or minors. McClellan became a reliever, after suffering injuries to his shoulder as a starter at low A. Garcia had TJ surgery on his way up.
I’m down in Rogers, AR doing a March of Dimes walk with family. It’s actually at the Naturals ballpark. Really nice facilities here (Walmart money?) They have all kinds of signs round here abt them being 2010 Texas league champs. They playthe Tulsa Drillers tonight but we gotta go back. I’ll try to post a pic of the field if that’s possible.
A photo would be great.
The Yankees claimed right-hander Jess Todd off of waivers from Cleveland
1. Nick Punto, 2B
2. Colby Rasmus, CF
3. Albert Pujols, 1B
4. Matt Holliday, LF
5. Lance Berkman, RF
6. Yadier Molina, C
7. Daniel Descalsco, 3B
8. Tyler Greene, SS
9. Kyle Lohse, P
Molina is playing better. I hope he is an adequate as punch hitter today……….or Berkman is going to be walked 2 or 3 times……….. This is the point where Pujols and Berkman should have flopped………..
Dangerous first inning……….when Lohse is taking the little “hops” after his release…..danger awaits…
they held back the breaking pitch……. Hope we get runs early….we may need them.
We have to get some runs,,,,,,,,,,,that was a miracle escape…………..
One positive thing……….Lohse has to start attacking now if he wants to go 6……. doesn’t have the hard slider for some reason
Here’s a second positive thing. We are going to win this game!!
I figure about 6 to 3, good guys.
Pitches around field………has control of a guy that can hurt you……..and Molina is playing around with location crap………. hard to understand….he threw to the target.
This is the mystery inning coming up……….. they either start dealing………or continue the mystery pecking…………Gallardo isn’t even being force to throw strikes………….
The was one of the most formidable stretch doubles you’re going to see. It takes a set of wheels to cut off of first that fast.
Now Gallardo is pitching a no-no………………. Rasmus is 3/2 ….and looks at his dream pitch. Question is……..why is he looking for any pitch there………. why speculate?
Lohse is 70 through 5……….may go 7…………..
TLR might have to take him out for a pinch-hitter, make Gallardo work harder.
Nope. Kyle made his throw 4.
We interrupt your regularly scheduled program to announced that Tyler Greene officially sucks.
Yep……I don’t understand the kid sometime. Weak toss home that Albert cuts off, then tries to bunt 3-0 at ball 4. Draw the damn bat back, jeez.
Tony calls for the bunt 3/0………………..Greens steps out of the box 3/2 and yells for the signs again from Okendo??????????????? Tony is an AH………Greene is in trouble…….
This is why Tony could rightfully be call …….medaling………warms up Salas to close……….changes pony right in Boggs face making him the mop up of hold guy…….and then sends him out……..he rolls..and now Mott…..not Salas…….
Tony soils himself……….shows up his SS and Pen………Berkman is “smalled”……….and this is the rub…………….he just gave away tomorrows game…….bet on it………….. the guy isn’t focused…he needs to take a week off and get over his shingles………… He tried to do way to much from the dugout, every single move failing miserably………..
Too much Gallardo today. We will have to get back after these Brew Crewers tomorrow!!
Some of those 9th inning extra owe to Berkman. Lance is not the speediest RF.
This stuff about Tyler Greene………….. thats as good as he plays……..After giving away the no hitter, Gallardo goes 3/0 to Green….for a team that has lost 7 in a row…………… and Tony decides to do a little teaching…………genius……….. should be able to get that one down…….incredible…… the guy hit the hardest ball of the day…..and he makes him bunt 3/2……because he should be able to? Right.
Here is the issue…………..you just heard from Mo today……..about Franklin………. what? Mo appealing to the fans to get Tony to loosen up on Franklin????????? Give that some thought…… the games are about to start……………… Brewers announcers asked some very interesting questions about the state of the union………………… I wonder if Mo would like to see Albert moved around a little……..and is just practicing with the Franklin rap?????????
It was enjoyable seeing lots of hustle. Would have preferred it come from the home team, but still. Guys run hard, play hard. Crash into walls, run into the corners, hustle down to second to break up a pivot. Big stars run out routine outs. I enjoy seeing it on a baseball field.
At least we aren’t the only team with no arms in the OF and a middle infield that’s not going to dazzle.
Boggs and Motte stunk up the joint.
Okay I know I am going to get roasted for bringing this up again, but I just had to share this little tidbit from Jeff Sullivan, who runs Lookout Landing, a popular Seattle Mariners blog. He is talking about last night’s walkoff win by the Mariners:
“They interviewed Ryan in the dugout after the game. He’s just about the most likable player of the bunch. I so hope that he’s good, or at least not bad. I know Tony La Russa had his problems with him but I’m pretty sure lots of fine and reasonable people would have problems with Tony La Russa. Brendan Ryan is a treat.”
Sorry, but I am still not buying the clubhouse cancer BS.
Ryan may have not been as well liked in the clubhouse as some players but I am positive Tony and Co. never said he was a cancer in the clubhouse. I am not sure where you are coming from with that. Brendan Ryan got traded because he was awful. He hit .200 and even though he made some spectacular plays at short he also flubbed a lot of routine plays and made the most bone headed plays I have ever seen a professional make.
Uh oh! You better duck LB…………………..
No need WC
Whether or not he would have been traded for being awful in 2010 is something we’ll never know.
Crdswmn-just leep your head in the sand for spaceboy Brendan………………..Who gives a rqats ass about what some Seattle blogboy says?Being likeable on a Seattle team with Bradley on it is like being the only person with steaks at a hamburger cookout.don`t take much.
A similar response about the location of your head BW would not be appropriate on a family blog. Have a nice day in Koolaid World.
On further reflection my prior response was a little small of me. I’m human, I react. It happens.
BW I thiink Bradley is not an accurate comparison because he is a notorious troublemaker who is not performing. That is an easy sell. Ryan is not performing offensively but whatever he did or didn’t do that was troubling, it has not been to the level of Bradley. My issue all along has the extent to which personal comfort has been put ahead of what is best for the team. Had the Cardinals been able to get a SS who had the clubhouse demeanor they wanted plus the better offense and at least something close to the defense Ryan provided, I would not have questioned the trade of Ryan. If Ryan had been the kind of trouble Bradley is, I would have not questioned the trade at all regardless of who the Cardinals got to replace him. The real test in my mind is whether the Cardinals would be willing to go with the hard sell, the big troublemaker who is performing, like Miguel Cabrera. In that case, I doubt it, because again, at least to TLR, and to a lesser extent MO, form is more important than substance, imo.